About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
's oil flows. lawmakers have until march the 1st to cut $500 billion from the pentagon's budget over the next decade. if they don't automatic cuts kick. in with that dangling overhead the military has had its hands tied they tell us. jennifer pentagon -- griffin is at the pentagon tonight. i know they want more money. >> that's right. it is significant in terms of the message that it sends to iran right now in a very tense time in the middle east. but it is and it is the first concrete sign that the budget uncertainty is going to have a real impact on national security. at a time when tensions are are high with iran over its nuclear program and negotiations might be coming soon, the u.s. had had a policy of having two aircraft carriers over the golf for the past two years. the uss eisenhower will deploy later this month. but it will go alone we're told to replace the uss. according to george little said facing budget uncertainty continuing budget resolution and across the board sequestration cuts made this request to the secretary and he approved. secretary of defense approved to rev
to testify about the pentagon's response to the attack on ought consulate. he said the u.s. didn't have enough time to respond. he says it's not like you can pick up the phone and call 911. mike emanuel is on the hill. set the stage for us on this hearing. >> reporter: it's designed to address the concerns of south carolina senator lindsey graham who threatened to hold up the confirmation for chuck hagel, his successor. so what did the president know about the benghazi attack september 11, when did he know about it and what did he do about it? sources i talked to say panetta and others are carrying out the orders of the commander-in-chief. so what were they and how were they handled. expect fireworks. rick: later on this afternoon the president's nominee the head of the cia takes center stage. >> reporter: expect john brenner to get plenty of questions about the use of enhanced interrogation techniques during this time at cia. he left there in 2005. at the white house they are emphasizing brennan's experience. >> mr. brennan brings, i think, not on a vast amount of experience, but a sig
them to be moved from the cia back to the pentagon. but the fact is that there has been something like a 700% increase in the use of drones under president obama as compared to george w. bush. >> and andrea, as you know, from your sources at the agency and i know from my sources not only from the agency but in the entire intelligence community when barack obama came into office, they specifically said, they wanted to ramp up drone operations. and they wanted there to be a side-by-side comparison of how many strikes bush did versus how many strikes they did. for brennan to say that he wants to pull back on drone strikes, that's just -- that's just not accurate. and that's not what's been happening since january 20th, 2009. you can go back. and when the history is written, you will go back to january 20th, 2009, and see a very deliberate -- >> executive orders. >> executive orders. and again, i think most americans probably support this policy. so it's not like i'm talking about anything that's going to be scandalous. most people will support the president doing this. but it obviously ca
from georgetown, serve as my chief of staff at the c.i.a. and then followed me to the pentagon as my chief of staff. and also someone who's had a public affairs at the pentagon, george little, who is also someone who both graduated and later taught here at georgetown. talented young individuals who have been at my side every day for the last four years at both the c.i.a. and the pentagon, and i am deeply grateful for their work for me and on behalf of the nation and i am deeply grateful for georgetown for training such extraordinary public servants. and speaking of extraordinary public servants, i think many in this audience know that there's a georgetown professor that the president has nominated to serve as the next secretary of defense, chuck hagel, and i am confident and i've expressed that confidence publicly that the men and women of the department of defense will have the kind of advocate they need as the nation emerges from more than a decade of war. lastly, i'm honored to be here, as i said, as a catholic and as a proud graduate of another jesuit institution, santa clara uni
return home, and i admit that when we first asked him to lead the pentagon, his answer was simple -- no. but i kept asking him. i am persistent. that is how michelle married me. i just kept at it, and it is a testament to his patriotism, to his sense of duty, that leon agreed to serve on this one last tour. perhaps it was the memory of his parents and opening their homes up to gi's added to the pacific, perhaps leon served himself, a young lieutenant in the army. perhaps it was the experience of watching his youngest son deployed to afghanistan. what we do know is this -- as our nation's's 23rd secretary of defense and every action beyond panetta has taken, every decision he has made has been with one goal in mind -- taking care of our sons and our daughters in uniform and keeping america safe. just think of the progress under his watch. because we ended the war in iraq, winding down the war in afghanistan, our troops are coming home, and next year our war in afghanistan will come to an end. we have put the core of al qaeda on the path to defeat. we have been relentless against its affi
georgetown, served as my chief of staff at the cia and followed me to the pentagon as my chief of staff. and also someone who is head of public affairs at the pentagon, george little, who is also someone who both graduated and later taught here at georgetown. talented, young individuals who have been at my side every day for the last four years at both the cia and the pentagon. and i'm deeply grateful for fore work on behalf of me and on behalf of the nation. and i'm deeply grateful to georgetown for training such extraordinary public servants. and speaking of extraordinary public servants, i think many in this audience know that there's a georgetown professor that the president has nominated to serve as the next secretary of defense, chuck hagel. i am confident and i've expressed that confidence publicly that the men and women of the department of defense will have the kind of advocate that they need as the nation emerges for more than a decade of war. lastly, i'm honored to be here, as i said, as a catholic and as a proud graduate of another just what institution, santa clara universi
of improving efficiency within the pentagon. i would say that applies to all the other agencies as well. secondly, most of the concern about sequestration is focused on readiness and training, which is absolutely true. if you talk to the lawyers that work with the defense contractors, they think they will have a field day care and some had testimony last year that the legal hassles emanating from sequestration may eat up a lot of their savings. but beyond that, there are a lot of dangerous places in the world. and what we do is try to develop capability to deal with the unknowable contingencies of what could happen at a place like syria or iran or north korea. with less money, you can prepare for future contingencies. the point is that it does not just readiness. it hurts us in the real world today. there are lots of options to deal with this. as was mentioned, the house passed bills twice last year to substitute sequestration's savings for other more targeted savings so that you save this amount of money, you're still fiscally responsible, but you don't get defense and these domestic p
washington post" that we needed to reduce dod as a reason to improve efficiency within the pentagon. that applies to all the other agencies as well. secondly, most of the concern about sequestration is about readiness. which is absolutely true. if you talk about the lawyers that work as defense contractors, they believe that they will have a field day. we have even had testimony last year that the legal household emanating from sequestration making up a lot of the savings. but beyond that, as senator ayotte and senator lindsey reference, there are a lot of dangerous places in the world. but we do is try to develop capabilities to deal with the unknowable contingencies of what could happen at a place like syria or iran or north korea. with less money, you can perform with fewer contingencies. this hurts us in the real world today. my final point is there are lots of options to deal with this. as was mentioned, the house passed bills twice last year to substitute sequestration savings for other more or other more targeted savings, so the same amount of money, and these domestic progra
until today to make these announcements. do you accept the criticism that the pentagon should have been we listed every major item we are talking about. we said we had to do furloughs. we said there would be cutbacks in readiness. we said unit costs would go up. all the same things. what we didn't do with a detailed budget planning and i don't regret that. we wouldn't have known the effects of the continuing resolution. we wouldn't have known that congress is going to change the size and the. moreover, we would have incurred the productivity and we would v done it six months ago, so i don't regret not doing that. i think we did sound the alarm in every way we could. >> i am wondering what kind of contract you are having with the white house and with congress there is going to have to be some. so are you trying to offer any solutions? also, i am wondering, what other things would you be doing right now if you were not spending all your time on this sequester. >> spending time with my wife -- i think i am hot the right person to answer. we are responsible for providing the nation's securi
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)